Sunday, October 15, 2006

Writing for a unanimous panel, Judge Tallman upholds a Section 924(c) conviction from a defense "in furtherance" attack. See United States v. Mosley, __ F.3d __, 06 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 17511 (9th Cir. Oct. 11, 2006), decision available here. A loss for the defendant, but the restrained language in the decision may be a win for the Defense.

Players: Hard fought appeal by D. Alaska AFPD Michael Dieni.

Facts: After Mosley had a car accident a chain of events lead to two searches of his apartment. Id. at 17514-15. In the apartment, cops found a loaded, cocked .22 Beretta pistol (left) on a shelf near the door, two loaded pistols in a bag with cocaine powder on it, gear to make crack cocaine, crack, and seven grand. Id. at 17516. At trial, Mosley moved for a Rule 29 on the § 924(c) count – use of a gun “in furtherance” of a felony. Id. at 17517.

Issue(s): “To prove that Mosley [committed a] . . . violation of § 924(c)(1)(A), the government must show . .. Mosley’s possession of the firearm was ‘in furtherance’ of the drug trafficking crime . . . . Mosley contests only whether the government’s evidence sufficed to establish the third ‘in furtherance’ element.” Id. at 17517-18.

Held: “Here, we are presented with a factual situation that falls between those in Krouse, Mann, and Rios. We hold that the evidence suffices to support a conviction under § 924(c)(1)(A). There can be little doubt that Mosely’s apartment was the base of operations for crack cocaine production and packaging. The substantial sums of cash and the general lack of furniture and personal items support the government’s theory that the apartment was a textbook example of a stash pad. To determine, however, whether the evidence sufficed to establish the requisite ‘nexus’ between the three firearms, and Mosley’s illegal drug trafficking requires us to consider the totality of the circumstances based on the evidence submitted at trial.” Id. at 17522.

Of Note: Writing for the panel, Judge Tallman conceded that “Many cases, including this one, involve more subtle factual situations [than in other § 924(c) decisions], and whether certain facts support a conviction under § 924(c)(1)(A) is sometimes ambiguous under current circuit precedent.” Id. at 17519. This is not the last word on the § 924(c) “in furtherance” inquiry – this is one of precious few federal statutes where there still survives some ambiguity subject to defense challenge.

How to Use: If the Section 924(c) “in furtherance” cases make up a spectrum, Mosley falls pretty squarely into the “bad facts” side of this range. In this case, there was a loaded and cocked gun by the apartment entrance, a scale and other crack-manufacture paraphernalia in the apartment, and not much furniture: all facts emphasized by the Ninth. As Tallman explained, “[W]e reiterate that this inquiry is fact specific, and, as in Krouse, we decline once again to adopt a checklist approach. There are simply too many possible factual scenarios likely to defy any test we may prognosticate based on so few cases in our jurisprudence.” Id. at 17523. There’s still plenty of room to fight a § 924 charge after Mosley – read the decision’s descriptions of the Circuit’s other “in furtherance” cases: Krouse, Mann, and Rios.

For Further Reading: Judge Berzon was part of the unanimous panel in this decision (Kozinski was the third). Interestingly, Judge Berzon also wrote the great Rios decision, rejecting a § 924(c) charge in a sawed-off shotgun case. See blog here. While Mosley is a loss for the defense, the opinion pretty carefully limits its holding to the facts of this case and avoids any broad new rules for the “in furtherance” inquiry. Perhaps Judge Berzon hated to see her great language in the Rios decision undermined, and was a moderating influence in the language of the final decision?

I find your blog very interesting. Furniture is a very important part of your home. And it is important to find not rather expensive, quality and nice items. It seems that Ashley Furniture is one of the most popular among the customers. Form a very informative site http://www.pissedconsumer.com I learned about all the advantages and disadvantages of the products and services of the company. There you can also find customer reviews on the inventory of the company.

Hello. I find your blog very interesting. I love decorating houses and I do know a lot about modern trends and furniture. I think that it is a great idea to discuss furniture fashion and quality trends. I would like to say a few words about Ashley Furniture. I think it is great. The price corresponds to the quality. From www.pissedconsumer.com I learned that some customers are disappointed with the company. Browse the site to learn about disadvantages of Ashley Furniture.

Starting up an office is quite a costly task. Barring the bigwigs, the people who start up an office at a limited budget try to save revenue wherever possible. Pareti mobili ufficio apart from saving money also has other advantages to it like flexibility and at the same time it also protects the privacy.

Thanks for writing such an interesting article. It’s really good to know about the furniture’s in such a detail. But have we ever thought how it would be to work for a Furniture store? There are so many kinds of jobs in the world right now. But we still have no idea at all, which one would be the perfect one for us, and which company would be strong enough to handle the global crisis. Surely we don’t want to apply to a company that suddenly must close because of the global crisis, do we? Well, here is an option for you. This would be the perfect option for you.

In the Careerbuilder.com, you would be able to see that the famous Ashley Furniture, one of the most famous furniture industries is searching for an employee. They are looking for the customer service. They need a few candidates that they could consider to fill the empty position. They need a customer service for the Ashley Furniture Home Store. Perhaps you should take a look in the AshleyHomeStoreNorcal.com to see more about the home store.